I think you’re close in your perspective but I don’t think I would describe it as generational nor using the game analogy. Here’s my suggestion - coming from s

I think you’re close in your perspective but I don’t think I would describe it as generational nor using the game analogy. Here’s my suggestion - coming from someone who spent a few years in the grassroots of a party’s infrastructure. First, the expectations of those who back a given party are way beyond reality. However the party elite sell this vision as achievable if only the party has the White House, both houses of Congress and the judiciary. Not only is this unreasonable, it completely unravels the minute all of these conditions aren’t met. Just look at all the executive orders and cornerstone legislation that Trump has been able to undo inside of a single term. Creating positions that requires an untenable, short-lived condition to be successful just doesn’t seem very smart to me. Yet both parties endorse this. At the same time, even when a single party controls everything it’s still not very good at getting what it wants — because there are a number of minority protections built in to the system. I think the first thing voters need to do is adjust our expectations. What can you compromise on? What positions can you live without entirely? What opposing policies might actually make sense over the next twenty or thirty years? I think it’s time we start thinking about how do we create laws that are sustainable when you don’t have all the power concentrated in one party.